In a little noticed speech, President Roh Moo-hyun of South Korea has once again disparaged his nation's alliance with the US and cast doubt on whether this partnership should be continued or dissolved.
President Roh told graduating cadets at the Korean Air Force Academy that South Korea was fully capable of defending itself against North Korea, thus undermining the reason for posting US combat forces in his country.
At the same time, the president asserted that the US would not be allowed to deploy US forces out of Korea without his government's approval, thus putting a crimp into Pentagon plans to forge US troops in Korea into a flexible force that could be swiftly deployed to contingencies outside Korea.
The US government has evidently chosen to ignore President Roh's remarks as scant reaction has come from Washington. E-mailed queries to the US military headquarters in Seoul asking for reaction have gone unanswered.
The commander of US forces in Korea, however, has reinforced, perhaps inadvertently, President Roh's views on the capability of South Korea's forces against North Korea. General Leon LaPorte, coincidentally speaking in Washington the same day, March 8, that Roh spoke in Seoul, told a Senate committee that North Korea's military forces were poorly prepared for armed conflict.
In particular, he said North Korea's air force was antiquated and struggling with maintenance. Where US and South Korean pilots averaged 15 hours a month of flight training, North Korean may get only 12 to 15 hours a year. On the ground, a unit on maneuvers could operate only six of its 12 vehicles because of shortage in supplies and fuel.
The US has already begun to reduce its troops in Korea and to turn over more duties to South Korea's forces. Last year, the US had 37,500 troops in South Korea. That is down to 32,500 today, with increments of 2,000 to 3,000 to be withdrawn yearly to bring the level down to 20,000 in 2008.
In his address at the Air Force Academy, President Roh said that 100 years ago, Japan, China, and Russia fought on Korean soil while Koreans "had no choice but to just watch helplessly." Now, he continued: "We have sufficient power to defend ourselves. We have nurtured mighty national armed forces that absolutely no one can challenge."
Even allowing for the exaggeration of a politician, that was a resounding statement. Not content with that, the president went on: "The armed forces have been exerting efforts to bolster our self-reliant defense capabilities.We must press ahead vigorously with the reforms of our defense already begun."
Pointing to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's plans for "strategic flexibility" that would assign US forces in Korea the mission of responding to crises elsewhere, Roh said: "We will not be embroiled in any conflict in Northeast Asia against our will. This is an absolutely firm principle we cannot yield under any circumstance."
That was generally seen as an attempt to prevent US forces from deploying to the Taiwan Strait in the event of hostilities between China and Taiwan. Roh, who campaigned on an anti-US platform and called for more self-reliance in defense, has been drawing Seoul closer to Beijing, which has also raised the question of how long he intends to maintain South Korea's alliance with the US.
Under Rumsfeld's orders, US forces will be moved from their present camps between Seoul and the 241km long demilitarized zone dividing the peninsula. They will be posted in consolidated camps 120km south of Seoul with quick access to airfields and ports through which they would ship out to other places of conflict elsewhere.
President Roh further appealed to a long-standing South Korean irritation, which is US command of South Korean forces in combat. "Within 10 years," he said, "we should be able to develop our military into one with full command of operations."
That would include, he said, "the capability for planning independent operations."
Not everyone in Seoul agreed with the president. With a few differences between Roh and the Bush Administration having become increasingly testy, the Joong Ang Ilbo, a leading newspaper, editorialized: "We are curious why Mr. Roh mentioned the issue publicly at this particular moment."
The newspaper said Seoul and Washington had not agreed to revise the security treaty. The editorial concluded: "We thus ask Mr. Roh to study the issue in earnest and enhance mutual trust between the two countries rather than just mentioning it openly." That was a polite way of saying maybe President Roh should have kept quiet.
Richard Halloran is a senior journalist based in Hawaii.
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
As the new year dawns, Taiwan faces a range of external uncertainties that could impact the safety and prosperity of its people and reverberate in its politics. Here are a few key questions that could spill over into Taiwan in the year ahead. WILL THE AI BUBBLE POP? The global AI boom supported Taiwan’s significant economic expansion in 2025. Taiwan’s economy grew over 7 percent and set records for exports, imports, and trade surplus. There is a brewing debate among investors about whether the AI boom will carry forward into 2026. Skeptics warn that AI-led global equity markets are overvalued and overleveraged
RSS